This section is intended to provide a background or context to the invention disclosed below. The description herein may include concepts that could be pursued, but are not necessarily ones that have been previously conceived, implemented or described. Therefore, unless otherwise explicitly indicated herein, what is described in this section is not prior art to the description in this application and is not admitted to be prior art by inclusion in this section.
Autonomous vehicles offer the prospect of eliminating the dangers of erratic driving or accidents. Specifically, the lack of human error while driving looks to result in a safer journey. Sensors in the autonomous vehicles appear to also allow for them to pack closer together, allowing more on the road, possibly shortening traffic times. Fully autonomous vehicles would also eliminate the need to pass a driving test or gain a driving license.
Nonetheless, there remain disadvantages to autonomous vehicles. One is the persistent worry of the computer crashing or malfunctioning, resulting in a major collision. Moreover, when they are first released, they are likely to be extremely expensive, most people won't be able to afford them, and the concept of driving car will likely remain appealing. Therefore, a large segment of the population will most likely want to keep normal cars.
The interaction between one autonomous vehicle and another autonomous vehicle while being complex may actually be less complex than the interactions between autonomous vehicles and those driven by humans.
Modifying behavior of autonomous vehicle based on predicted behavior of other vehicles is discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 8,655,537 B2. There, a vehicle being configured to operate in an autonomous mode could determine a current state of the vehicle and the current state of the environment of the vehicle, where the environment of the vehicle includes at least one other vehicle. A predicted behavior of the at least one other vehicle could be determined based on the current state of the vehicle and the current state of the environment of the vehicle. The reference discusses a confidence level could be determined based on the predicted behavior, the current state of the vehicle, and the current state of the environment the vehicle is in. In some embodiments, the confidence level may be related to the likelihood of the at least one other vehicle performing the predicted behavior. Such a vehicle in the autonomous mode was envisioned by the reference as being controlled based on the predicted behavior, the confidence level, and the current state of the vehicle and its environment.
Also in relation to a surface mine, U.S. Pat. No. 6,393,362 B1 discusses a dynamic safety envelope for an autonomous vehicle collision avoidance system. Each autonomous vehicle performs according to a predetermined trajectory related to its particular task and implemented by a guidance system through on-board GPS and two-way communications. The current position of the vehicle is continuously monitored and correlated to the position of potential hazards along its path, so that corrective action can be taken by implementing appropriate, predetermined control strategies. Each vehicle is assigned a safety envelope that accounts for the vehicle's physical presence and operating tolerances. The safety envelope is characteristic of each vehicle and is defined by a variable space surrounding the vehicle wherein it may be physically present as it travels along its intended trajectory. The shape and size of the safety envelope is dynamically varied to meet safety requirements for current trajectory conditions facing the vehicle as it performs its autonomous function along its predetermined path. The safety envelope is changed according to a predetermined set of rules specific to the vehicle. Intersections between predetermined vehicle trajectories along paths and roadways within the mine's property are identified dynamically by monitoring current traffic conditions and establishing locations where the safety envelopes of vehicles traveling along approaching trajectories could overlap.
WO 2001/088827 A1 discusses a permission system for control of autonomous vehicles in a mining operation, where such autonomous vehicle traffic is controlled by dividing predetermined trajectories into zones of free operation, called “permission zones”, wherein the vehicle is allowed to move according to predetermined permission parameters but unhindered by other constraints. Theses permission zones would be assigned and activated using criteria that ensure the vehicle would remain entirely within active zones so long as the vehicle acts within those predetermined permission parameters. Before it can begin to move, each autonomous vehicle is assigned an active permission zone that includes its current location. Each permission zone is also associated with a maximum velocity profile that ensures stoppage of the vehicle at the end of the permission zone. Subsequent permission zones along a predetermined trajectory would be assigned to a vehicle as soon as all other system constraints make it available.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,151,539 A is a patent that discusses autonomous vehicle arrangement and control by receiving one or more travel orders, route planning using position finding and digital street map, generating a vehicle path, sensors including for detecting objects and the condition features of the route, collision avoidance, vehicle condition data recognition, and controlling the vehicle, where the sensors were in various arrays and also used cameras.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,060,989 A is a reference that discusses preventing automobile accidents by using sensors positioned to sense conditions indicative of a drivers ability to effectively control the vehicle, analyzing the data to determine an appropriate response, and initiating the response.
US 2012/0095660 A1 is a reference that discusses autonomous emergency braking in a road vehicle in order to reduce the severity of an accident, the speed of the vehicle being determined during the autonomous emergency braking. A determination of speed which is independent of the wheel rotational speeds of the vehicle is used. By this means, the vehicle speed can be determined sufficiently accurately even in the cases in which, as a result of sharp autonomous braking, the vehicle speed would be higher than the wheel rotational speeds.
US 2010/0228427 A1 is a reference that discusses a predictive semi-autonomous vehicle navigation system. As described therein, an active safety framework performs trajectory planning, threat assessment, and semi-autonomous control of passenger vehicles. The vehicle navigation task is formulated as a constrained optimal control problem. A predictive, model-based controller iteratively plans an optimal or best-case vehicle trajectory through a constrained corridor. This best-case scenario is used to establish the minimum threat posed to the vehicle given its current state, current and past driver inputs/performance, and environmental conditions. Based on this threat assessment, the level of controller intervention required to prevent collisions or instability is calculated and driver/controller inputs are scaled accordingly so as to hopefully minimize controller intervention while ensuring that the vehicle does not depart from a traversable corridor.
US 2015/0179069 A1 is a reference that discusses an accident prevention system configured to analyze road data in view of the at least one vehicle attribute included in vehicle data. The application may also determine whether the road data is relevant and transmit, in response to the road data being relevant, a command to a display unit to display information based on the analysis of the road data.
The current invention moves beyond these techniques and materials.
Abbreviations that may be found in the specification and/or the drawing figures are defined within the text and in the detailed description section where appropriate.